No 10 rule breaking gatherings during 2020.

[nw1]

The fly in the ointment is, plain and simple, Labour. They damn well need to get their act together and provide some proper opposition (and I say this as a natural Conservative voter!). They need to stop focussing on Covid restrictions, and instead focus on the issues which are going to be of salience to voters over the next couple of years. They seem to have the same problems as the Conservatives - a lame leader, and an even lamer shadow cabinet.

Completely agree, but the good news for Labour is that by 2024, non-Covid issues (including 'fallout from Covid' issues) will completely dominate the agenda.

 

[ainsworth74]

Indeed, Dominic Cummings substack. Plenty of free material which I found interesting to read. He's clearly throwing Boris under the proverbial bus.

It is an interesting read. I certainly see how he got in with our political classes as he certainly talks a good talk (or I guess writes good words in this case ) and has interesting ideas. I did think about subscribing but at £10 per month or £100 for a year that was a bit too much support to someone who I fundamentally disagree with and think has done catastrophic damage to the country. I like hearing opinions I may not agree with but not for that price!

Still though, for now, the enemy of my enemy is my friend so long live Dominic Cummings and his crusade of revenge against Boris and Carrie Johnson.

 

[greyman42]

Completely agree, but the good news for Labour is that by 2024, non-Covid issues (including 'fallout from Covid' issues) will completely dominate the agenda.

Not for me they won't. I will not forget Labour's pro lockdown/restriction agenda.

 

[brad465]

Not for me they won't. I will not forget Labour's pro lockdown/restriction agenda.

For now I would say not many share your view, in the same way most of the Tory party at the time of the Iraq War supported it, but almost all the blame goes to Labour (or more specifically Blair). However, things may change as more of the fallout emerges, and what's also different compared to Iraq is our covid strategy was experienced more strongly first hand.

 

[greyman42]

For now I would say not many share your view, in the same way most of the Tory party at the time of the Iraq War supported it, but almost all the blame goes to Labour (or more specifically Blair). However, things may change as more of the fallout emerges, and what's also different compared to Iraq is our covid strategy was experienced more strongly first hand.

I never had a problem with Iraq or Blair. Still Don't.

 

[kristiang85]

I never had a problem with Iraq or Blair. Still Don't.

Off topic, but I recommend watching the documentary "Once Upon A Time in Iraq". It might well change your mind on the Iraq war. https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episodes/m000kxws/once-upon-a-time-in-iraq

 

[nw1]

For now I would say not many share your view, in the same way most of the Tory party at the time of the Iraq War supported it, but almost all the blame goes to Labour (or more specifically Blair). However, things may change as more of the fallout emerges, and what's also different compared to Iraq is our covid strategy was experienced more strongly first hand.

Though I suspect that the fallout will be blamed on the Tories as the incumbents and the implementors of the (some might say over-) extended lockdowns, irrespective of what Labour may have said during the crisis.

 

[greyman42]

Though I suspect that the fallout will be blamed on the Tories as the incumbents and the implementors of the (some might say over-) extended lockdowns, irrespective of what Labour may have said during the crisis.

I will not forget Labours attitudes during the crisis.

 

[bramling]

I will not forget Labours attitudes during the crisis.

Labour have been dire.

Their opposition has simply been to sling mud, with little evidence of what they would instead do, and no attempt to offer their own position up to scrutiny as a potential "government-in-waiting". The electorate seem well aware of this, hence why Labour have made little if any headway, despite Johnson lurching from crisis to crisis, with people instead seeming to turn to the Liberal Democrats who have scooped up the protest votes without having to actually do much apart from be on the ballot paper. It does indicate that Labour have failed to learn much from 2019.

I'm not a Labour supporter in any shape or form, but they need to start providing some proper opposition, and they need to start doing it fast.

 

[Bayum]

JRM with an interesting quip today. "In my view, those in the public eye don't tend to lie to the public".
Does he actually know who BJ is?

 

[brad465]

Labour have been dire.

Their opposition has simply been to sling mud, with little evidence of what they would instead do, and no attempt to offer their own position up to scrutiny as a potential "government-in-waiting". The electorate seem well aware of this, hence why Labour have made little if any headway, despite Johnson lurching from crisis to crisis, with people instead seeming to turn to the Liberal Democrats who have scooped up the protest votes without having to actually do much apart from be on the ballot paper. It does indicate that Labour have failed to learn much from 2019.

I'm not a Labour supporter in any shape or form, but they need to start providing some proper opposition, and they need to start doing it fast.

If there is such a thing as "learned too much", that's what Labour have done. They recognise Corbyn's behaviour and policy was bad, but so is doing the polar opposite, when the best is in the middle. An ideal leader would be a hybrid of Starmer and Rayner; one is too cautious, the other too reckless. The wider issue here is our electoral and political systems are very poorly setup, hence why we get idiots/career politicians in Parliament. Johnson essentially exposed why having no constitution and/or a system based on "good morals/trust" is a really bad idea, and much of that will have been what's helped him get away with crisis after crisis, and survive partygate so far.

We will not get good Governance and Opposition while the systems in place are setup the way they are, simple as. The trouble is the only people who can change the system are the ones who benefit from the system right now, unless the system faces a catastrophic breakdown, which in this case would be an actual revolution like 1789 across the Channel.

Elsewhere the Telegraph's Christopher Hope is reporting that "there was no cake" at Johnson's party, which effectively throws Conor Burns under a bus/embarrasses him more:

https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1486791571328712711

** NEW on Chopper's Politics Podcast ** Boris Johnson could not have been "ambushed" by a cake at a 10 Downing St birthday party when Covid restrictions were in force because there was no cake there, the Prime Minister has told his allies.

In an unexpected twist in the 'partygate' saga which is gripping Westminster, Conor Burns, one of his inner circle, told today's Chopper's Politics podcast: "I'm told under some authority indeed from him that actually wasn't a cake"

I'm not sure what this is actually meant to achieve, if anything, although those on the right claiming this has gone on long enough and/or blaming left wing entities trying to remove Johnson, can't use such attack lines in response to a Telegraph article.
https://t.co/zqIBP7i1Ut

 

[ainsworth74]

JRM with an interesting quip today. "In my view, those in the public eye don't tend to lie to the public".
Does he actually know who BJ is?

Has even met himself? He of lying to the Queen fame over prorogation in autumn 2019...

 

[brad465]

For those who haven't had the joy of seeing this yet, Joe Lycett posted this absolute beauty of a spoof leak of Sue Gray's report and reaction from official staff:

https://twitter.com/joelycett/status/1486635223756464129

BREAKING: Leaked Sue Gray report reveals shocking abuse of the rules. Hard to see how the PM can cling on after this.

 

[GusB]

For those who haven't had the joy of seeing this yet, Joe Lycett posted this absolute beauty of a spoof leak of Sue Gray's report and reaction from official staff:

https://twitter.com/joelycett/status/1486635223756464129

View attachment 109383

Oh to have been a fly on the wall when that was going on!

 

[dosxuk]

JRM with an interesting quip today. "In my view, those in the public eye don't tend to lie to the public".
Does he actually know who BJ is?

This is a prime example of the soft of thing Boris gets up to. Firstly Jacob doesn't say that "those in the public eye don't lie to the public" - he gives Boris a Dover lorry queue sized gap with the addition of "tend" to that sentence. Secondly, he talks about lying to the public - the accusations being levelled on Boris at the moment are that he has lied to Parliament and other MPs - again, another get out if it does get confirmed he lied.

It's all calculated so that you hear one thing, but they're actually not saying what you thought.

 

[Bayum]

This is a prime example of the soft of thing Boris gets up to. Firstly Jacob doesn't say that "those in the public eye don't lie to the public" - he gives Boris a Dover lorry queue sized gap with the addition of "tend" to that sentence. Secondly, he talks about lying to the public - the accusations being levelled on Boris at the moment are that he has lied to Parliament and other MPs - again, another get out if it does get confirmed he lied.

It's all calculated so that you hear one thing, but they're actually not saying what you thought.

Absolutely. Look at BJ’s responses to Partygate so far.

 

[LOL The Irony]

For those who haven't had the joy of seeing this yet, Joe Lycett posted this absolute beauty of a spoof leak of Sue Gray's report and reaction from official staff:

https://twitter.com/joelycett/status/1486635223756464129

View attachment 109383

That's gold

 

[96tommy]

So the great cover up begins...

Met Police have asked Sue Gray to make minimal reference to the parties they are investigating in her report. Months down the line, the Met Police will find no evidence of wrong doing. No wonder Boris was so relaxed that he was under Police investigation....

 

[DelayRepay]

So the great cover up begins...

Met Police have asked Sue Gray to make minimal reference to the parties they are investigating in her report. Months down the line, the Met Police will find no evidence of wrong doing. No wonder Boris was so relaxed that he was under Police investigation....

Is this a cover up? The alternative theory is that the Met are actually investigating, and are concerned that publication of the report could prejudice their investigations.

 

[brad465]

Is this a cover up? The alternative theory is that the Met are actually investigating, and are concerned that publication of the report could prejudice their investigations.

Earlier this week the police were happy with the report to be published, despite the Government claiming it should be delayed while the investigation is carried out. The amount of changing position that they and the likes of Johnson has made, and the timings of everything, is only causing more suspicions and damaging their reputations.

I do also wonder now how likely it is something from the report will be leaked, given all the delays to its publication and now this latest police request will only be causing resentment in some circles.

 

[ainsworth74]

The theory that seems to be doing the rounds on Twitter (beyond the suggestion of it being an orchestrated cover up) is that perhaps the Met are looking beyond just cake gate and getting into the higher than usual instance of phones going missing, emails and texts being deleted, suggestions that people have perhaps been instructed to clean phones and email accounts, etc. Which, if such things have been done, would bring down the potential for far more serious charges (i.e. in the Crown Court in front of a jury with potential jail time on the line serious) than just summary breach of lockdown rule offences.

 

[96tommy]

There is no denying that the whole timing of all this look suspicious. It's one of either poor incompetence by the Met Police (believable), or a cover up between the Met Police and no.10 (just as believable)

 

[dosxuk]

There is no denying that the whole timing of all this look suspicious. It's one of either poor incompetence by the Met Police (believable), or a cover up between the Met Police and no.10 (just as believable)

Or the brief chance the Met have had to look at what's in the report has revealed a whole load more issues that are actually going to need investigation rather than a summary "yeah, they broke the lockdown restrictions but as fixed penalties we won't be applying them retrospectively, everyone about your business" which is what was generally expected.

If evidence of cleaning up of data / loss of evidence / instructions to delete has discovered, it could get very awkward to the occupants of Downing Street (and not just the MP's) very quickly, and you can see why the Met would want to keep what they know under wraps for any future charges.

 

[Dent]

Met Police have asked Sue Gray to make minimal reference to the parties they are investigating in her report.

How can a report make "minimal reference" to the thing it is a report into? That doesn't make sense.

Is this a cover up? The alternative theory is that the Met are actually investigating, and are concerned that publication of the report could prejudice their investigations.

How does making information available "prejudice" their investigation? As part of their investigation they should be using the available evidence, so making information available helps them.

 

[Busaholic]

There is no denying that the whole timing of all this look suspicious. It's one of either poor incompetence by the Met Police (believable), or a cover up between the Met Police and no.10 (just as believable)

Cressida Dick would have to stand down if Johnson (and, by extension, P. Patel) went, as nobody else would accept her position as any more tenable than Johnson's. Sadiq Khan doesn't demand she leave only because he's scared Patel will make an even worse choice as replacement.

 

[jon0844]

So, Boris said he'd resign if the report showed he'd broken any laws/rules.

Now the report has to be censored to protect the police investigations, and further on from that it seems if they just pay a fixed penalty then there will be no record made and the problems go away. I assume they'll all just cough up and that'll be that..

 

[DelayRepay]

The theory that seems to be doing the rounds on Twitter (beyond the suggestion of it being an orchestrated cover up) is that perhaps the Met are looking beyond just cake gate and getting into the higher than usual instance of phones going missing, emails and texts being deleted, suggestions that people have perhaps been instructed to clean phones and email accounts, etc. Which, if such things have been done, would bring down the potential for far more serious charges (i.e. in the Crown Court in front of a jury with potential jail time on the line serious) than just summary breach of lockdown rule offences.

This is what I wondered. If they were going to issue fixed penalty notices, there wouldn't need to be much of an investigation. One assumes those involved would be keen to accept in order to avoid further action.

How can a report make "minimal reference" to the thing it is a report into? That doesn't make sense.

I think the suggestion is the report be published covering events that the Police aren't interested in, maybe where there were very minor breaches of the rules or where there's no real evidence. If this happens we could go through the list of 'known' events, and by a process of elimination work out which ones the Police are looking at. I'd prefer the full report to be published, evidence and all. Let the people read it and make their own decisions.

How does making information available "prejudice" their investigation? As part of their investigation they should be using the available evidence, so making information available helps them.

The police have the evidence anyway. But perhaps they want to do further investigations before the evidence they have is made public. For example, if there is additional evidence related to some of the events that Sue Gray did not obtain, is it possible someone might decide to destroy it when they see what evidence the Police do have?

I also wonder whether the Met should be investigating this at all, given their officers were present and, presumably, took no action when laws were being broken. Should the investigation actually be handled by another body such as the IPCC?

 

[nw1]

JRM with an interesting quip today. "In my view, those in the public eye don't tend to lie to the public".
Does he actually know who BJ is?

Has Mogg ever said anything which even vaguely makes sense?

 

[Philip]

I question whether the police need to get involved at all. It is well known that police resources are stretched currently so should they be using their resources for investigating breaking lockdown rules and technically perverting the court of justice, rather than focusing their resources on fighting more serious crime?

 

[GusB]

The theory that seems to be doing the rounds on Twitter (beyond the suggestion of it being an orchestrated cover up) is that perhaps the Met are looking beyond just cake gate and getting into the higher than usual instance of phones going missing, emails and texts being deleted, suggestions that people have perhaps been instructed to clean phones and email accounts, etc. Which, if such things have been done, would bring down the potential for far more serious charges (i.e. in the Crown Court in front of a jury with potential jail time on the line serious) than just summary breach of lockdown rule offences.

I'm concerned by these suggestions of emails etc. being deleted. At the very least this could be conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, which potentially carries a fairly hefty sentence.

I question whether the police need to get involved at all. It is well known that police resources are stretched currently so should they be using their resources for investigating breaking lockdown rules and technically perverting the court of justice, rather than focusing their resources on fighting more serious crime?

Perverting the course of justice isn't a serious crime?